Universal Security, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Apr 3, 2017

13-CA-178494 (N.L.R.B. Apr. 3, 2017)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
UNIVERSAL SECURITY, INC.
and Cases 13-CA-178494
13-CA-182708
SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL
UNION LOCAL 1
ORDER
The Respondent’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment with respect to the
complaint allegations relating to the Respondent’s revised uniform and lanyard policy is
denied. The Respondent has failed to establish that there are no genuine issues of
material fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.1 This denial is without
prejudice to the Respondent's right to renew its arguments to the administrative law
judge and before the Board on any exceptions that may be filed to the judge's decision,
if appropriate.
Dated, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2017
PHILIP A. MISCIMARRA, ACTING CHAIRMAN
MARK GASTON PEARCE, MEMBER
LAUREN McFERRAN, MEMBER

1 Acting Chairman Miscimarra agrees with the denial of the Respondent’s motion as
stated in the Board’s Order. As he stated in L’Hoist North America of Tennessee, Inc.,
362 NLRB No. 110, slip op. at 3 (2015) (concurring), “[I]n response to a motion for
summary judgment, I believe that the General Counsel at least must explain in
reasonably concrete terms why a hearing is required. Under the standard that governs
summary judgment determinations, this will normally require the General Counsel to
identify material facts that are genuinely in dispute.” See also Leukemia & Lymphoma
Society, 363 NLRB No. 124, slip op. at 2 (2016) (Member Miscimarra, dissenting). In
the instant case, the General Counsel’s opposition has explained in extensive detail
why, based on material facts that are genuinely in dispute, a hearing is required.